The reason I took it personally should be fairly obvious — you MADE it that way! For example, by calling me someone with a “victim” mentality and a “people problem.” So don’t back out and try to say that you didn’t start it — you did. It’s all there in the record.

Nonetheless, I will own up you are right about my chronology. It wasn’t precise in terms of when I actually committed money; it makes sense that someone could have read it that I was in all the way. Fortunately, I wasn’t.

I’ll still dispute you on one front — and this is the problem I have with a lot of discussion about “design” in general. I don’t understand how anyone can judge the quality of an architectural design without knowing the context of it — the kind of people who are going to live in it, the time and place that the building will occupy.

The needless bump-out you speak of, for example, has a definite purpose that is immediately obvious when you are in the space — it provides a natural visual siteline to a local park which without the small change in angle would be hard to see. Such sitelines and vistas are useful in making small spaces (recall the ground floor is only like 280 sf) feel bigger. Though our change in angle might seem like architectural fancy, in a small space this kind of vista is nearly a requirement. Otherwise it will feel like you are, well, living in a converted garage.

Note that this small change in angle would not occur if the whole building rectangle was extended and we “got our money’s worth.” Similarly, I felt that maximizing space by connecting the two buildings was NOT a positive thing. I like feeling separate!

In both cases, bigger is not better. (Isn’t this one of the basic insights of the small-house movement?)

More generally, I think the division between wants and needs you describe is not nearly as obvious as you declare. All people “need” to live is the kind of dwelling and resources they get in a prison camp or hospital bed, yet very few of us would consider such situations acceptable dwellings. Humans don’t really need showers or stoves to live. Everything above basic food and warmth is a want.

So a lot of architecture is about meeting wants. I think I pretty clearly defined my wants when I said early in the post that I wanted to make this place a demonstration of “nice housing on an appropriate environmental scale”.

I guess “nice” is subjective too. From my subjective point of view, I don’t think that trim and finishes are enough to “pimp my ride.” Indeed this project doesn’t have the fanciest trim or finishes available; we decided not to put money into ostentation. We “pimped” the place up with a really nice structure and as much glass as we could get away with. It’s true there are one or two nice surfaces — like a custom concrete counter, but there were functional reasons concrete was the right choice too. But we didn’t get into “luxury” materials like marble, exotic tile, etc. Indeed the bathroom is as plain as it can be and it’s just fine with us.

As of today I pretty much know the total price of the project: $75,000 including architect and permit. The contractor very dutifully stuck to his price, except for one truly unforeseeable plumbing issue.

It’s nice to know that there are still people like this. I think it helped that his final estimate was based on plans that had really been through the wringer, so he had plenty of time to think about it. It may also have helped that he had done buildings by my architect before. The finished space elicits wows from most people who see it, so if we used it as a market rental I think we could easily get a rent that would more than meet our monthly payment.

So it seems like it’s all working out. As soon as the inside is truly finished I will do an extensive post. Hope you turn back and check it out. Good luck with your own project!

Regards, bottleman

First off, the relative intelligence comment was not a backhanded comment, but may be you took it that way. Sorry. I just don’t know you. Maybe you are Superintelligent. And no I haven’t spent any time talking to you about your needs. Needs are obvious, we are discussing wants. There is a reason most people are telling you the same thing and why you had to shop around for an architect and a contractor to give you wants. Most people are out here to make a living not a headache of a project, but that is only because of the budget. If you had said money was not object then none of what I have said would apply.

I read the whole string above. I didn’t read the rest of the series because I only wanted to comment on the above string. Sure I made some assumptions based on your writing above, where your wrote

“March-April-May 2006…I hire him on a handshake.

Great! I think. We’re on track. Maybe we can finish by fall!

June-July-August 2006

All the architect needs to do is get the building permit now.”

This is why I ASSUMED you hired your contractor before permitting. You have it chronologically outlined. If you didn’t actually contract, at the very least you committed your heart before you knew it was a bunch of trouble, so now instead of making a level headed decision you are all worked up about it and started your rant on this web page.

I guess I see a disconnect here with what your trying to do. You are trying to do a project which has encountered some problems with some acceptable solutions to budget, schedule, and permitting problems. Some of which have been suggested by others as well. But instead of taking clues from the environment as you have reported here, you are stubbornly try to “crunching the numbers again, trying to figure out if it’s all worthwhile still” and shoe horn this thing in at 150% your original budget. Why? I guess it’s worth it to you right?

Granted a turret and a skylight are not the same, but their net effect should not be that different (flooding the space with light). As for connection it could just be a walk way roof that was connecting the two together. And, the kick out is not doing anything for your design, that I can see, but raising the cost. After I figured out what that was I just want to know why its there? It seems like for the cost you could just expand the whole side another five feet and get your money’s worth.

I never claimed to not have a problem with people. But I didn’t air my problems to the world for critique and you did. Besides, you don’t know Peter, my neighbor. But that is not the point, so don’t change the subject. The point of this discussion is your project, not mine.

Making a tiny house doesn’t mean you have to have crazy architectural details incorporated structurally. Trim and finishes should be enough to ‘pimp your ride’. I love the stair you selected. You could have just gone with the ladder trick and then put that ladder in.

I do however want to applaud your drive and the courage it took to go legit! I am sorry you are so upset by the bureaucrat and not getting exactly what you want. I hope it all works out the way you want it. Maybe you can just finish the project before it escalates to $100k (that would be $357/sf!!!!) Personally I would be cutting costs to the bare bone. At the very least I would try to make it cash flow as a rental unit for the sake

Finally, saying you have a people problem is not to say you don’t know how to deal with them. It just seems you are taking this all way too personally. It is just a remodeling project, it is not YOU. Imagine how you’d feel if you’d done twenty or thirty of them so far. Besides this is supposed to be fun right?

Touché
Robert

I am flattered to know that someone cares enough to spend that much time writing to me. I also feel YOUR pain, with your frustration with your local government.

I also certainly don’t mind you being a little direct and opinionated. More power to you! On the other hand, I think that some of your direct, opinionated comments were based on, um, a less than careful reading.

You made a few assumptions about me, then critiqued me on the basis of those assumptions. (Hey, it’s just like we’re married!)

For example, you addressed your comments to Rudy, but were clearly referring to me, the author of this post, and I’m not Rudy!

Maybe more substantially, you worried about things like this..

I have never seen more problems arise than out of contracting a project before it has been permited. Your design professional should follow this process…

The construction job WASN’T contracted before it was permitted. Why do you assume it was? I never said it was. As you suggest, I had just paid for design and some permitting work. At the end of the post I wasn’t “committed and stuck with a large bill,” as you describe. Rather, I had construction estimates and was trying to decide whether I should go ahead with it. This was clearly suggested from my statement..

I am crunching the numbers again, trying to figure out if it’s all worthwhile still.

You also assume a bunch of stuff about my design preferences, for example that I should connect the place to the house and call it an addition, or that there’s no difference between a turret and a skylight, or that I don’t understand the consequences of a small kickout.

I interviewed a number of contractors and architects for this job, and I said no to every one who did what you’re doing: assuming you know my needs before you’ve even talked 5 or 10 minutes with me. What if I don’t want it to be connected to the main house for my own reasons? What if I completely understand that in my situation there IS a difference between a turret and a skylight? I’ve lived in a number of very small dwellings and I’ve discovered that these details DO make a difference to quality of life. Fortunately my architect wasn’t like that..

Ultimately you suggest I have a “people problem.” Meanwhile (if you’ve read the rest of this series, something you also apparently neglected to do) my project is going on in a most satisfying way, and you have been tattled on by neighbors. For the record, I visited all my neighbors with schematic drawings long before we went into permitting. I got them excited about what I wanted to do and there haven’t been any problems at all with the neighbors. Perhaps that’s an approach you should have taken? But don’t talk to me, I have a people problem.

Just givin’ it to you straight and opinionated, like you like it!

Your sidekick in “relative intelligence,”

bottleman

I have some input that will not solve your problem, but may explain some of the trouble your having. It may be a little direct and opinionated, but i think it is realistic: First off, the Architect should be to blame for much of your trouble. He should have taken it upon himself to work out the permiting issues. That is afterall what you hired him for, right? Make him fix it. Unless the permiting service was not part of your contract. Regardless, I have never seen more problems arise than out of contracting a project before it has been permited. Your design professional should follow this process: SD, DD, CD, PERMITTING, Bidding, CA. It is in that order for a reason. If he would have advised you to wait until permiting to contract, then you would have an out. Just because you design something doesnt mean you have to build it. Its like business planning, sometimes the plan doesnt pan out. Now youre committed and stuck with a large bill. Plus you sound passionate about this. Emotional decsions are not adviseable with large budget items (ask your financial planner. I wont go into cash flow or Return On Investment) Second, you sound like your taking a victim point of view, which is great for the letter to the councilman, but you are grown and sound relatively intelligent. There is no reason for me to expect that you are not fully aware of bureaucratic inefficiency. [def. bu·reau·crat - an official who works by fixed routine without exercising intelligent judgment.] Besides, the left hand never knows what the right hand is doing, not to mention the mindset and personality of the people who work for the city. You have to steal something to get fired, but then you can run for mayor. We all know. So why are you suprized that this happened? You could have outsmarted them, i think. So now youre upset that we dont live in the ideal world you’d like to have? Sorry dude, get used to it. Look at all the energy your wasting on your anger. That needs to be channeled into your project. Third, why your construction cost has escalated? I would take a step back and ask some questions. Why do you need all this engineering anyway? The only re-engineering you need is Value Engineering. Wood frame construction is regulated by the IBC, it has standardized construction techniques, why cant you just follow follow convention and save like $25,000. It can still be just as cool. What is with that expensive looking kicked out wall that adds like 8 square feet to the foot print? cant you get rid of that and keep the wall that is there now? And who cares if its a turret or a sky light? you cant improve on light, just let it in. I still think you should make the connection to the house and call it an additon, and forget about it. Fourth, have you considered sweat equity? Get a discount from the contractor for work you can do yourself, demo, framing, etc., but negotiate the price and get it in writing first. There is no reason you should pay that much for that little house, its ridiculous. And stop paying those professionals that are driving up the cost and schedule. If you must pay someone, find a code consultant and a permit runner, or someone who can get the job done. What a mess.

I have said all of that to say, I think you have a people problem, and i have no idea how to fix that, cause we are all broken (insert gospel here). Best of luck.
Feeling your pain,
Robert

1) On your first comment, I have no doubt that someone from the States can live very well in a Central American country. The income disparities are large.. a modest income is quite large by Central American standards. By that same token, what you are talking about is a kind of economic fiction… it requires an inflow of money from a wealthy country, and a continuous disparity between the ‘emigres’ and the citizens. I note that your condo projects are clearly aimed at an American vacationer or retiree population, what with title insurance from a florida company, prices of $189,000 to $250,000 and gated security. How many Nicaraguans will be buying these?

Perhaps this critique seems unfair.. I know that’s not strictly what my post is about — it’s about building codes and small dwellings — but my sense is that most of the people interested in living small are also interested in what might be termed social justice. They don’t see living simply as something they do ABOVE others, they see it as something they do to contribute to the community. I am not sure your gated development fits into that vision.

2) On the environmental front, sure, bamboo is a fine building material. Nothing against it. But if you’ve read this blog, especially entries like this one, you’ll know that using green materials can delude people into thinking they’re being efficient, when the real issue is scale. First of all, if this is somebody’s second or third house, it’s a nearly 100% waste of materials. Second, size matters a lot. I can save an amazing 75% of wood merely by cutting my house size by 75% … say, from 2000 to 500 square feet. At 2300 square feet, your condos are nearly average for new American dwellings, and far larger than is necessary for a high quality of life, unless you’ve got a big family, which few retirees have. That size will translate into a continued consumption of energy throughout the building’s lifetime.

I don’t mean to dump on you; perhaps there is some aspect to this that I don’t understand. But this is a site about the environment and the way people perceive and use it.  From an environmental or social perspective I can’t see that what you are building and selling differs much from what’s available in the States. It’s just cheaper, which isn’t enough.
Deepest regards, bottleman

I think you might have missed something about my goals. Yes, I love alternative construction techniques (straw bale, etc) and tiny tiny houses (less than 200 square feet) but my goal was to make a rental ADU in the city, by converting an existing garage. This necessitated a certain amount of conventionality in the design.

Even if conventionality was not so necessary: The compound design you suggest is clever, but actually takes up quite a bit of ground space. I don’t have room for it on my city lot!

Even if there was room: a compound of small 100 square foot buildings is NOT the same as a single 400 square foot building — not in my climate anyway. In my climate a single building would be much preferrable.

The difference between the two projects is vast, so comparing costs is a kind of theoretical exercise. The projects do not have the same function or nature.

Finally, what you suggest is to bet my entire project on a legal loophole. Even if I win, I don’t want to spend years fighting the city over that loophole. I’d rather build the safe, aesthetically proper thing I designed in the first place.

So, sorry to sound like I’m dismissing your suggestion, but I listed out all the reasons to make a point: no single prefab solution, whether technical (straw bale) or legal (building things of less than 200 sf) is going to solve the general problem here… which is that governments and planners might give lip service to environmentally sensitve building, but when it comes to small houses are as hidebound as Gulliver.

Cheers!

i’m afraid i’ve got to echo Chimimahnah’s experience, i grew up in a small very conservative republican town, and it was not so different. now my aunt lives in a remote corner of montanta in a log cabin that i’m pretty sure is not up to code…

anyway, if porn is not enough, since you’re going republican, it is now ok have a harem of underage boys at your disposal… it’s only ok if you’re a republican, (IOKIYAR) though